P.V. Doshi v. CIT

113 ITR 22High Court1978#531 most cited

What is P.V. Doshi v. CIT authority for?

The lack of jurisdiction to initiate reassessment proceedings under Section 147/148 cannot be waived and can be challenged at a later stage, even if not raised initially. An invalid reassessment due to such jurisdictional defects cannot sustain subsequent penalty proceedings.

179

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2009 to 2026.

Also referred to as

P.V. Doshi v. CIT · 113 ITR 22 · jurisdiction reassessment · section 147 · section 148 · waiver of jurisdiction · challenge jurisdiction later stage · invalid assessment · penalty proceedings · section 271D · reopening of assessment · Gujarat High Court

Sections most often in play

Section 143(2)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 151Section 10(38)Section 115BBESection 127(2)(b)

Issues it is cited on

section 2(7)section 120(4)(b)section 120(1)section 163section 2(7a)section 115jasection 120section 16mere change of opinionsection 156section 127interest under section 234b

Judgments citing P.V. Doshi v. CIT

RAO KHEM CHAND VIDYA VIHAR SHIKSHA SAMITI,REWARI vs. ITO-TDS,ROHTAK, ROHTAK

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 3856/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri M.R. Sahu, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Section 12ASection 191Section 200(3)Section 200A(1)Section 201Section 234ESection 40a

…td Vs. CIT (2016) 389 ITR 326 (P&H)", "Siksa O Anusadhan Vs. CIT (2011) 336 ITR 112) [Orissa.HC)", "CIT Vs. Mohd. Ayyub Agency (1992) 197 ITR '637 (All.HC)". "CIT Vs. Cellulose Products of India Ltd [1985] 151 ITR 499 (Guj.HC)- (FB)", "P.V.Doshi Vs.CIT [1978] 113 ITR 22 (Guj.HC)","CIT Vs. Mahalaxmi Sugar Mills Co. Ltd [1993] 200 ITR 275 (Del.HC)', "Taylor Instrument Co. (India) Ltd Vs.CIT [1992] 198 ITR 1 (Del.HC)". 'Kiran Singh & Others Vs. Chaman Pawan & Ors. (1955) 1 SCR 117 (SC).' 4. Briefly stated, the facts of the case, the assessee is a Charitable Trust Registered u/s 12AA of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [the…

TUFEL,GURGAON vs. ITO,WARD 4(4),GURGAON, GURGAON

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 3293/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri M.R. Sahu, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 127(2)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 44ASection 69A

…td Vs. CIT (2016) 389 ITR 326 (P&H)", "Siksa O Anusadhan Vs. CIT (2011) 336 ITR 112) [Orissa.HC)", "CIT Vs. Mohd. Ayyub Agency (1992) 197 ITR '637 (AII.HC)". "CIT Vs. Cellulose Products of India Ltd [1985] 151 ITR 499 (Guj.HC)- (FB)", "P.V.Doshi Vs.CIT [1978] 113 ITR 22 (Guj.HC)","CIT Vs. Mahalaxmi Sugar Mills Co. Ltd [1993] 200 ITR 275 (Del.HC)', "Taylor Instrument Co. (India) Ltd Vs.CIT [1992] 198 ITR 1 (Del.HC)". 4. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual residing in a rural village and engaged in operating his own three Trucks for transportation business. The AO received a…

ASHOK KUMAR JAIN,DELHI vs. PR, CIT 20, NEW DELHI

ITA 2641/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year : 2018-19 Ashok Kumar Jain, Vs. Pr. Cit-20, C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, New Delhi. F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi – 110 085. Pan: Aakpj1872B

For Appellant: Dr. Kapil Goel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms Pooja Swaroop, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148ASection 151Section 263Section 69C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : B : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2018-19 Ashok Kumar Jain, Vs. Pr. CIT-20, C/o Kapil Goel, Advocate, New Delhi. F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi – 110 085. PAN: AAKPJ1872B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Dr. Kapil Goel, Advocate Revenue by : Ms Pooja Swaroop, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 10.11.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 26.11.2025 ORDER PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM: This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order dated 29.03.2025 of the Pr. Commissioner of…

GEETA SHARMA,SUNAM vs. ITO, SUNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 491/CHANDI/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh17 Nov 2025AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Sh. Rajiv Saldi, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Prem Singh, Addl. CIT
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 149

…into operation\nwas that jurisdiction cannot be conferred by consent or\nagreement where it did not exist, nor can the lack of jurisdiction\nbe waived.\n8. 6. These judgments were subsequently noticed by Hon'ble Gujarat\nHigh Court in the case of P. V. Doshi 113 ITR 22(Gujrat). This\ncase arose under the Income Tax Act with reference to the\nprovisions of Section 147 dealing with re-assessment. The facts\nwere that the assessment was sought to be reopened under\nSection 147 and notice under section 148 was issued. Validity\nof reopening was not challenged upto Tribunal and additions\nwere challenged on merits on…

RAHUL RASTOGI,NEW DELHI vs. PCIT, GHAZIABAD

ITA 844/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Sept 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

Section 147Section 151Section 263

…tion was that jurisdiction cannot be conferred by consent or agreement where it did not exist, nor can the lack of jurisdiction be waived. 8. 6. These judgments were subsequently noticed by Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of P.V. Doshi vs. CIT (1978) 113 ITR 22 (Guj). This case arose under the IT Act with reference to the provisions of s. 147 dealing with re-assessment. The facts were that the assessment was sought to be reopened under s.147 and notice under s.148 was issued. Validity of reopening was not challenged upto Tribunal and additions were challenged on merits only. The Tribunal restored the mat…

SARENA PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. PCIT CENTRAL, DELHI-3, DELHI

ITA 2480/DEL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

For Appellant: Shri Ambareesha Agrawal, CA &For Respondent: Shri Mahesh Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263Section 263(1)

…tion was that jurisdiction cannot be conferred by consent or agreement where it did not exist, nor can the lack of jurisdiction be waived. 8. 6. These judgments were subsequently noticed by Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of P.V. Doshi vs. CIT (1978) 113 ITR 22 (Guj). This case arose under the IT_Act with reference to the provisions of s.147 dealing with re-assessment. The facts were that the assessment was sought to be reopened under s.147 and notice under s.148 was issued. Validity of reopening was not challenged upto Tribunal and additions were challenged on merits only. The Tribunal restored the matt…

SARENA PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. PR,CIT CENTRE DELHI-3, DELHI

ITA 2479/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

For Appellant: Shri Ambareesha Agrawal, CA &For Respondent: Shri Mahesh Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263Section 263(1)

…ation was that jurisdiction cannot be conferred by consent or agreement where it did not exist, nor can the lack of jurisdiction be waived. 8. 6. These judgments were subsequently noticed by Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of P.V. Doshi vs. CIT (1978) 113 ITR 22 (Guj). This case arose under the IT_Act with reference to the provisions of s.147 dealing with re-assessment. The facts were that the assessment was sought to be reopened under s.147 and notice under s.148 was issued. Validity of reopening was not challenged upto Tribunal and additions were challenged on merits only. The Tribunal restored the matt…

M/S KARIA BUILDERS ,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 14(3), PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2401/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2017-18 M/S. Karia Builders Ito, Ward 14(3), Pune 402, Konark Indrayu, Kondhwa, Vs. Pune – 411048 Pan: Aadfk5220B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sanket M Joshi Department By : Shri Ramnath P Murkunde Date Of Hearing : 17-07-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 23-07-2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Sanket M JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 147Section 148Section 269SSection 271DSection 274Section 275(1)Section 296S

…Shailesh Joshi vs. DCIT vide ITA Nos.95 & 96/PUN/2016, for assessment years 2009-10 & 2010-11, order dated 27.03.2018 7 ii) Subhash Chandra Dey vs. ACIT (2022) 220 TTJ 625 (Gauj) iii) B.R. Bamasi vs. CIT (1972) 83 ITR 223 (Bom) iv) P.V. Doshi vs. CIT (1978) 113 ITR 22 (Guj) 15. He submitted that once such assessment is considered as invalid, then the penalty proceedings u/s 271D of the Act cannot be sustained. For the above proposition, he relied on the following decisions: i) CIT v. Manoharlal Thakral [(2018) 93 taxmann.com 156 (P&H HC)] ii) Ravi Nirman Nigam Ltd. v. ACIT [ITA No. 4140/Mumbai/2023] dated 28.0…

NEHA GOEL,FARIDABAD vs. PCIT , FARIDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assesse is allowed

ITA 2624/DEL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 May 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Shamim Yahya & Sh. Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2014-15 Neha Goel, Vs. Pcit, H. No. 585 Sector 15 Faridabad. Faridabad 121007. Pan No.Ahcpg6493Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 10(38)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 151Section 263

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘E’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. SUDHIR KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2014-15 Neha Goel, Vs. PCIT, H. No. 585 Sector 15 Faridabad. Faridabad 121007. PAN No.AHCPG6493Q (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Appellant by Dr. Kapil Goel, Adv. Respondent by Ms. Amisha S. Gupta, CIT DR Date of hearing: 28/05/2025 Date of Pronouncement: 28/05/2025 ORDER PER SUDHIR KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal is preferred by the assessee against the order 28.03.2024 of the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Faridabad [hereinafter referred to…

INDO PACIFIC FINLEASE LTD,CHANDIGARH vs. PCIT- CHANDIGARH 1, CHANDIGARH

In the result, both the appeals are filed by the\nassessee are allowed

ITA 449/CHANDI/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh16 Apr 2025AY 2015-16
For Appellant: \nSh. Ashok Goel, C.AFor Respondent: \nSh.Rohit Sharma, CIT-D.R
Section 147Section 148Section 203(1)Section 263

…nto operation was\nthat jurisdiction cannot be conferred by consent or agreement where\nit did not exist, nor can the lack of jurisdiction be waived.\n\n8. 6. These judgments were subsequently noticed by Hon'ble Gujarat\nHigh Court in the case of P. V. Doshi 113 ITR 22(Gujrat). This case arose\nunder the Income Tax Act with reference to the provisions of Section\n147 dealing with re-assessment. The facts were that the assessment\nwas sought to be reopened under Section 147 and notice under\nsection 148 was issued. Validity of reopening was not challenged upto\nTribunal and additions were challenged on merits onl…

INDO PACIFIC FINLEASE LTD,CHANDIGARH vs. PCIT CHANDIGARH 1, CHANDIGARH

In the result, both the appeals are filed by the\nassessee are allowed

ITA 448/CHANDI/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh16 Apr 2025AY 2014-15
For Appellant: \nSh. Ashok Goel, C.AFor Respondent: \nSh.Rohit Sharma, CIT-D.R
Section 147Section 148Section 203(1)Section 263

…into operation was\nthat jurisdiction cannot be conferred by consent or agreement where\nit did not exist, nor can the lack of jurisdiction be waived.\n8. 6. These judgments were subsequently noticed by Hon'ble Gujarat\nHigh Court in the case of P. V. Doshi 113 ITR 22(Gujrat). This case arose\nunder the Income Tax Act with reference to the provisions of Section\n147 dealing with re-assessment. The facts were that the assessment\nwas sought to be reopened under Section 147 and notice under\nsection 148 was issued. Validity of reopening was not challenged upto\nTribunal and additions were challenged on merits onl…

ASLAM FAZLUREHMAN KAGDI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR. CIT-1, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 131/AHD/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2015-16

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 56(2)(vii)

…the assessee in the assessment proceedings and raising of such legal ground not before the Assessing Officer but for the first time before the PCIT, jurisdiction cannot be confirmed on the PCIT. The Ld. AR relied upon the decision of P.V. Doshi vs. CIT (1978) 113 ITR 22 (Guj). The Ld. AR also relied upon the order of the Tribunal in the case of Shrimant F.P. Gaekwad vs. ACWT (2010) 3 ITR (T) 476. The Ld. AR further submitted that notice issued under Section 263 of the Act was responded by the assessee vide submission dated 06.01.2020 but the same was not taken into account by the PCIT. 7. The Ld. DR submitted th…

SHEO PARSHAD,GURGAON vs. ITO,WARD 4(1),GURGAON, GURGAON

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes in the aforesaid manner

ITA 597/DEL/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Sept 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri M.R. Sahu, CAFor Respondent: Shri Anuj Garg, Sr. DR
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 288Section 36

…ing Co. Ltd Vs. CIT (2016) 389 ITR 326 (P&H)", "Siksa O Anusadhan Vs. CIT (2011) 336 TR 112) |Orissa HC)", "CIT Vs. Anand Prasad [1981] 128 ITR 254 (Del.HCY, "CIT Vs. Cellulose Products of India Ltd [1985] 151 ITR 499 (Guj.HC)-(FB)","P.V. Doshi Vs.CIT [ 1978] 113 ITR 22 (Guj.HC)". 5. After perusing the aforesaid Application for admission of Additional Grounds, we are of the considered opinion that the aforesaid grounds being purely legal in nature goes to the root of the matter and are emanating out of the facts appearing in the impugned intimation dated 08/12/2020, which do not require any investigation and all…

M/S. CHECKMATE SERVICES PVT. LTD.,,VADODARA vs. THE ADIT, CPC, BANGALORE PRESENT JURIDICTION THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), , VADODARA

In the result, appeal preferred by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 69/AHD/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Jul 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 69/Ahd/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2019-20) िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" M/S. Checkmate Adit, Cpc, बनाम बनाम/ बनाम बनाम Services Pvt. Ltd. Bangalore Vs. G.F 6-9, Amaan Tower & Suvas Colony, Fatehgunj, Dy.Cit Vadodara, Gujarat, Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara 390002 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacc8465A (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Shri M. R. Sahu, Ar अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, Cit. Dr 12/07/2024 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 16/07/2024 O R D E R Per Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, (In Short ‘The Cit(A)’) Dated 08.12.2022 For The Assessment Year 2019-20. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That Assessee Had Filed Its Return Of Income For A.Y. 2019-20 On 30.09.2019 Declaring Total

For Respondent: Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, CIT. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)

…Vs. CIT (2016) 389 ITR 326 (P&H)", "Siksa O Anusadhan Vs. CIT (2011) 336 ITR 112) [Orissa HC)", CIT Vs. Jai Parabolic Springs Ltd (2008) 306 ITR 42 (Del.HC), "CIT Vs. Cellulose Products of India Ltd [1985] 151 ITR 499 (Guj.HC)- (FB)","P.V.Doshi Vs. CIT [1978] 113 ITR 22 (Guj.HC)". ITA No. 69/Ahd/2023 [M/s. Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. vs. ADIT] A.Y. 2019-20 - 7 – 7. The replaced grounds taken on merit by the assessee vide letter dated 30.06.2023 are as under: “1. That on the facts, and in the circumstances of the case and in law293/ CIT(A) erred in confirming adjustment of Rs.5,87,43,293/- u/s.36(1)(va) r.w.s…

SATYA SANKALP VILLA (ELLISBRIDGE) PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-8(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal preferred by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1132/AHD/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Jun 2024AY 2004-05

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1132/Ahd/2014 (िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2004-05) िनधा"रण वष" Satya Sankalp Villa The Income Tax Officer बनाम बनाम/ बनाम बनाम Ward – 8(1), Ahmedabad (Ellisbridge) P. Ltd. Vs. Dharmadev House, Shyamal Cross Road, Satellite, Ahmedabad, Gujarat 380015 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaics2707B (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Shri Mahesh Chhajed, A.R. अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Saumya Pandey Jain, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 05/06/2024 24/06/2024 Date Of Pronouncement O R D E R Per Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Xiv, Ahmedabad (In Short ‘The Cit(A)’), Dated 16.01.2014 For A.Y. 2004-05. 2. This Is Second Round Of Appeal Before This Tribunal. Before We Adjudicate The Grounds Taken By The Assessee In This Appeal, It Will Be Relevant To Recapitulate The Facts Of The Case.

For Respondent: Ms. Saumya Pandey Jain, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153C

…see submitted that the assessee was entitled to raise additional ground challenging the jurisdiction of the AO in the second round of litigation. In support, he relied upon the decisions of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of P. V. Doshi vs. CIT, [1978] 113 ITR 22 (Guj) and CIT vs. Jolly Fantasy World Ltd., [2015] 57 taxman.com 80 (Guj.). He ITA No. 1132/Ahd/2014 (Satya Sankalp Villa (Ellisbridge) P. Ltd. vs. ITO) A.Y.– 2004-05 - 4 – explained that additional ground raised by the assessee challenges the validity of assessment order passed under Section 143(3) r.w.s. 153C of the Act. He submitted that the…

S S BRAHMA EDUCATIONAL TRUST,MAYURBHANJ vs. PRINICIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PCIT, SAMBALPUR, SAMBALPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 107/CTK/2024[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack05 Jun 2024AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri P.K.Mishra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 148Section 263Section 69

…आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण, कटक न्यायऩीठ,कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अऩीऱ सं/ITA No.107/CTK/2024 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2015-2016) S S Brahma Educational Trust, Vs The Pr.CIT, Sambalpur C/o : Kamalendulal Mohanta, Chitrada, Morada, Mayurbhanj PAN No. :AAHTS 6753 P (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri P.K.Mishra, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT-DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 05/06/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/D…

ITO, WD.9(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S MAHARAJ VINCOM PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

ITA 35/KOL/2021[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 May 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No.35/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Ito, Ward-9(1), Kolkata……………….......................…...……………....Appellant Vs. M/S Maharaj Vincom Pvt. Ltd……............…..........................…..…..... Respondent 69, Jamunalal Bajaj Street, Kolkata- 700007. [Pan: Aafcm6496E] C.O. No.6/Kol/2023 (A/O I.T.A. No.35/Kol/2021) Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S Maharaj Vincom Pvt. Ltd……............…..........................…....... Cross-Objector 69, Jamunalal Bajaj Street, Kolkata- 700007. [Pan: Aafcm6496E] Vs Ito, Ward-9(1), Kolkata …………..….......................…...……………....Respondent Appearances By: Shri Miraj D. Shah, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Abhijit Kundu, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Department. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : March 07, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 15, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: This Appeal By The Revenue & Corresponding Cross-Objection By The Assessee Have Been Preferred Against The Order Dated 08.09.2020 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-7, Kolkata (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Cit(A)’) Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’).

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250Section 263

…as put into operation was that jurisdiction cannot be conferred by consent or agreement where it did not exist, nor can the lack of jurisdiction be waived. 8.6. These judgments were subsequently noticed by Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of P. V. Doshi 113 ITR 22(Gujrat). This case arose under the Income Tax Act with reference to the provisions of Section 147 dealing with re-assessment. The facts were that the assessment was sought to be reopened under Section 147 and notice under section 148 was issued. Validity of reopening was not challenged upto Tribunal and additions were challenged on merits only. Th…

ITO, WARD-6(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S DANIEL COMMODITIES PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

ITA 645/KOL/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 May 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No.645/Kol/2020 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Ito, Ward-6(1), Kolkata………..…….......................…...……………....Appellant Vs. M/S Daniel Commodities Pvt. Ltd…..........…..........................…..…..... Respondent 6, Lyons Range, Kolkata – 1. [Pan: Aaccd9344F] C.O. 4/Kol/2023 (A/O I.T.A. No.645/Kol/2020) Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S Daniel Commodities Pvt. Ltd…………….....................…..…..... Cross-Objector 6, Lyons Range, Kolkata – 1. [Pan: Aaccd9344F] Vs Ito, Ward-6(1), Kolkata …………….......................…...……………....Respondent Appearances By: Shri Abhijit Kundu, Cit-Dr, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Department. Shri Miraj D. Shah, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 23, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 07, 2024

Section 143(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250Section 263

…as put into operation was that jurisdiction cannot be conferred by consent or agreement where it did not exist, nor can the lack of jurisdiction be waived. 8.6. These judgments were subsequently noticed by Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of P. V. Doshi 113 ITR 22(Gujrat). This case arose under the Income Tax Act with reference to the provisions of Section 147 dealing with re- assessment. The facts were that the assessment was sought to be reopened under Section 147 and notice under section 148 was issued. Validity of I.T.A. No.645/Kol/2020 & C.O. 4/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/s Daniel Commodities P…

ANOOP NOPANY,KOLATA vs. ITO, WARD 40(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1381/KOL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Apr 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No.1381/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Anoop Nopany………………….…….…................…...……………....Appellant P-39, 2Nd Floor, Princep Street, Kolkata- 700072. [Pan: Abfpn3215L] Vs. Ito, Ward-40(1), Kolkata….....…..........................................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Narendra Kedia, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Sanjay Paul, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 19, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : April 23, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 19.07.2023 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, Ld. Cit(Appeal) Nfac, Failed To Notice That Assessment Order Dated 31.12.2018 Passed Under Section 143(3)/263 Of The Act Is Bad In Law, Void Ab-Initio, Lacks Jurisdiction Since Original Assessment Order Dated 30.12.2016 Passes U/S 143(3) Was Bad In Law, Void Ab Initio. & Consequentially Any

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 263

…al proceedings. That the issue of jurisdiction can be raised at any stage even in appellate or execution stage. Neither the Rule of Estoppels nor the Principle of res-judicata can confer the jurisdiction where none exists. The facts in the case of P. B. Doshi 113 ITR 22(Gujrat) are very much relevant wherein re-assessment proceedings were initiated against assessee and an addition was made to his income. Before AAC, contention about validity of notice for re- assessment was given up by the assessee and on merits appeal was dismissed. On further appeal, Tribunal remanded matter to file of ITO with direction to on…

GANDHINAGAR DISTRICT CO.OP.MILK PRODUCERS UNION LIMITED,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE GANDHINAGA, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 512/AHD/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Mar 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate & ShriFor Respondent: Dr. DArsi Suman Ratnam, CIT D.R. & Shri
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 80PSection 80P(2)(c)Section 80P(2)(d)

…ed that it is well settled that the issue of “reopening” is with respect to “jurisdiction” can be raised at any stage. Reliance is Gandhinagar District Co. Op. Milk Producers Union Ltd. vs. ACIT Asst.Year –2014-15 - 6– placed on “P. V. Doshi vs. CIT - (1978) 113 ITR 22 (Guj) in support of the above contention. 9. On going through the reasons for reopening of assessment, we observe that there is no specific allegation that there is any non-disclosure on part of the assessee during the course of assessment proceedings. In the recent case of PCIT v. DSC Ltd. 153 taxmann.com 535 (Delhi), the High Court held that wh…

Showing 1–20 of 179 · Page 1 of 9

...